Blatter said Saturday on Germany's Focus weekly that the dramatic change would make the tournament more interesting. He says the change could involve going to a shootout after 90 minutes of regulation or adding sudden-death overtime.

Sudden-death overtime was used in the knockout rounds of the 1998 and 2002 World Cups. FIFA then reverted to its previous rule of having teams play a full 30 minutes of overtime if tied at the end of regulation in the knockout rounds.

First-round games always have ended in draws if tied at the end of regulation.

Click to expand...

I think this would be a horrible idea, especially if they use penalty kicks right after regulation. Draws are just a part of soccer and I don't think they make the sport any less exciting.

I think they makes it less exciting. It feels unresolved to me. And I know there are others who agree with me (although I have no clue what percentage of the population they are).

Also, the tie-breaker system feels pretty lame to me. You could theoretically have every team in a group tie each other every time, yet somehow some of the teams are better than the others? How does that work?

I'm a casual soccer fan, and penalty kicks/shots are always exciting...still, that's definitely not how important games should be decided. Ending draws is fine with me, as long as penalty kicks do not come in until really late in the game.

I don't see any harm in draws in group stages. That said, I have to agree with Millz on this one. I wouldn't have a problem with them not allowing draws as long as it's NOT from penalty shoot outs. That would be disastrous, imo. But then I guess the question is, how long will you allow a game to keep going? What if there is still no goal after 120 minutes for instance? How long do you keep playing? it's a tricky one actually. :-/

People watch sports to be entertained and obviously they want to see lots of goals scored and they want to find out which team is better than the other (which a draw doesn't do). Sport is more than just entertainment though. It's competition. And I think the most important thing in competition is fairness in determining the outcome of a match.

If a game is 90 minutes long and the score is tied after 90 minutes, then neither team was better than the other. Sure, you can say one team played better, but the score is what matters. What's wrong with calling the game a draw? Is it fair to choose a winner by means of penalty kicks, which is slightly less random than a coin toss? The players have control over the outcome in a shootout, but it certainly doesn't show which team is the better football team. One team will get lucky and win, while the other team goes home with nothing to show for the draw that they earned on the field playing actual football.

There were plenty of very entertaining draws in the World Cup this year. USA vs Slovenia? Would anyone want that to be decided by penalty kicks? I sure wouldn't.

One other thing is that removing draws could change strategy and make some games LESS exciting. For example, an inferior team that needs a win. They might be better off trying for a 0-0 tie and hoping to get lucky in a shootout instead of going for the win in regulation where they will likely be outplayed by a better team.

People watch sports to be entertained and obviously they want to see lots of goals scored and they want to find out which team is better than the other (which a draw doesn't do). Sport is more than just entertainment though. It's competition. And I think the most important thing in competition is fairness in determining the outcome of a match.

If a game is 90 minutes long and the score is tied after 90 minutes, then neither team was better than the other. Sure, you can say one team played better, but the score is what matters. What's wrong with calling the game a draw? Is it fair to choose a winner by means of penalty kicks, which is slightly less random than a coin toss? The players have control over the outcome in a shootout, but it certainly doesn't show which team is the better football team. One team will get lucky and win, while the other team goes home with nothing to show for the draw that they earned on the field playing actual football.

There were plenty of very entertaining draws in the World Cup this year. USA vs Slovenia? Would anyone want that to be decided by penalty kicks? I sure wouldn't.

One other thing is that removing draws could change strategy and make some games LESS exciting. For example, an inferior team that needs a win. They might be better off trying for a 0-0 tie and hoping to get lucky in a shootout instead of going for the win in regulation where they will likely be outplayed by a better team.

Click to expand...

But here's the thing - even though the teams are tied, there are tiebreakers in place.

I'm only a casual soccer fan, and I don't really understand why people dislike shootouts so much. But at least shootouts have some amount of skill involved to determine the winner, unlike basing who advances off if your tie was higher scoring than another team's tie, or whatever.

But here's the thing - even though the teams are tied, there are tiebreakers in place.

Click to expand...

Yes, if the teams are tied on points then they use goal differential, followed by goals scored, to break the tie. Even with just wins and losses you end up with ties. There's no perfect way to break a three way tie.

I'm only a casual soccer fan, and I don't really understand why people dislike shootouts so much. But at least shootouts have some amount of skill involved to determine the winner, unlike basing who advances off if your tie was higher scoring than another team's tie, or whatever.

Click to expand...

Because it's not football. It takes certain elements of football and turns it into something else. It would be like the NBA using a game of HORSE instead of overtime, or MLB doing a home run derby instead of extra innings. Skill? Yes. Does it prove who the better team is? No.

I also find it to be a very poor idea, particularly if adopted for the world's greatest cup competition.

As it's already been pointed out, draws are part of the game, sometimes you cannot seperate teams and a draw is a fair conclusion. A penalty shoot-out would destroy the integrity of the game simply by reducing the skill and turning the competition into a lottery.

The English FA were going to introduce something similar by having a penalty shoot-out at the end of every league game, the winner picks up a bonus point along with the usual point for a draw and three points for a win.
It goes without saying that the idea was laughed at and never did surface.

I know Blatter likes to show who's in charge but I think more time should be put into video technology and fairness in football, not turning it into an even bigger lottery.